Also, why should I care about CA lawsuits anyway? It's not like they exist around here.
If you haven't already, you may wish to look into the EU's studies into implementing class action policies, under the name, "collective redress". (
A starting point) While you may not have the option of a class action lawsuit today, the option may become available in the near future, except in the case actions against of Valve, who have preemptively denied you that option.
Valve wanted to protect themselves from CA lawsuits, and even gave a reasonable explanation why (in short, CA lawsuits in general only make profits for CA lawsuit lawyers).
And I would contend that their given reason is little more than a smokescreen. How many class-action lawsuits have video game developers, publishers, and distributors faced that have been thrown out as frivolous? On the other hand, what tools do consumers have available to them that can put them on equal footing in a courtroom with a multimillion dollar corporation, with an expansive and presumably well-trained legal team on retainer?
I'm certainly not contending that Valve is trying to do anything but preemptively defend themselves against class-action lawsuits, of course. I just don't think that reason for doing so does outweighs the value of the class-action lawsuit as a tool of the consumer.
[Valve] in addition, offered to cover all reasonable costs arising from lawsuits being brought by individuals.
This is actually misrepresenting Section 12 of the Steam Subscriber Agreement. The bit to which you refer is (and please correct me if I'm wrong):
If you seek $10,000 or less, Valve agrees to reimburse your filing fee and your share of the arbitration costs, including your share of arbitrator compensation, at the conclusion of the proceeding, unless the arbitrator determines your claims are frivolous or costs are unreasonable as determined by the arbitrator.
(Emphasis mine.)
Valve does not reimburse you the cost of your representation, which is realistically the largest cost you would face in such a matter (making it the largest barrier to action), and should arbitration fail, Valve does not oblige themselves to cover any of your costs for taking the case to small claims court, which would be your next and last recourse, under the new SSA. Moreover, it's important to note that Valve agrees to pay these expenses at the conclusion of arbitration, so that if you cannot afford the filing fee and arbitration costs at the outset, then you cannot even get the process underway. Contrary to your implication, none of this is exactly screaming to your customers, "Hey! Hold us accountable, if we do something wrong!" In fact, it's doing quite the opposite by removing a tool that allows the consolidation of claimants' legal costs, which would reduce the barrier to action by much more than Valve's promises in the updated SSA do.
Now, let's take a step back for a moment. Of the three companies, who have instituted these contractual prohibitions against class-action lawsuits, which is most likely to reverse its decision? Valve. Of the three, Valve seems to be the one most aware of its critics and the one most willing to respond to its critics. I'm not "bashing" Valve because I think they're as bad as Microsoft and Sony; I'm criticizing Valve because I think they're better than Sony and Microsoft and better than this change to the SSA. By taking this position, encouraging others to do the same, and encouraging them to be vocal about that position, I think that a message can be driven home to the decision makers within Valve that wouldn't get nearly as far at Sony and Microsoft.
What would have the opposite effect of that message, though? Maybe something like participating in a Steam marketing campaign, designed to extend the Steam user base and further yoke existing Steam users, while Section 12 of the SSA stands as it currently does. Make no mistake that a marketing campaign is exactly what giving a
Portal 2 coupon to all current owners of
Portal 2 is, precisely because they hope that people will give the coupons away or use them to buy gift copies of
Portal 2 for others. It's actually a pretty cool marketing campaign, and were it not for my current objections with the Steam service, I'd enthusiastically participate. As it stands, though, participation in this marketing campaign would serve to send Valve a message opposite the one I think they need to hear. Therefore, my
Portal 2 coupon will sit in my Steam inventory, until it expires.
